HOFer (inevitable) Ichiro Suzuki

User avatar
Donn Beach
Posts: 15109
Joined: Thu May 02, 2019 1:06 am

Re: HOFer (inevitable) Ichiro Suzuki

Post by Donn Beach » Wed Jan 24, 2024 4:23 pm

Don't know about it being racial but there is a discussion. What might be getting missed is how really popular Ichi is around the league. It's viewed as a homer bias here when in fact he might be even more popular in other parts of the country
Per Olney on social media:

Ichiro deserves to be a unanimous selection for the HOF next year. Just as Griffey, Jr., Jeter, Beltre, etc. deserved it. Hopefully, that happens.
Fox sports writer
There's no need to overthink this one: Ichiro has a chance to become just the second ever unanimous selection after Mariano Rivera. Maybe a voter or two will look at his measly home run total and his complete lack of postseason experience (which he had very limited control over) and declare him unworthy of the Cooperstown call. I sure hope not

Big_Maple
Posts: 1684
Joined: Fri Aug 12, 2022 8:55 pm

Re: HOFer (inevitable) Ichiro Suzuki

Post by Big_Maple » Wed Jan 24, 2024 5:46 pm

Was waiting to hear from the board before I chime in.

My opinion is that he should be, but likely won't be. Mariano was a blip. A freak. It may never happen again.

The reason, I believe, is that there aren't machines that are making induction decisions... machine that use batting averages or WARs or gold gloves to empirically calculate their votes. If there were, lots of candidates - like Beltre - would be unanimous. Pujols should be unanimous. Trout should be unanimous. Ohtani should be unanimous. They easily meet the criteria for HOF induction based solely on their numbers, so a bunch of AI decision makers would unanimously induct them.

The fact is, it's a bunch of folks from the BBWAA who decide. They're human. They cast ballots based on more than just numbers. Maybe they don't cast one for Ichiro on his first year because someone else they feel is deserving is on their last year of eligibility. Maybe they are purists ("I won't vote for Bonds because anyone tainted with PEDs never gets inducted"). Or traditionalists ("I don't think we should count 1,300 of Ichiro's hits from his career in Japan"). Maybe they think no one should not be elected in their first year. Who knows. It's an intrinsically human endeavor, and as such it is as unpredictable as any election ever is. So unless he is the only name on the ballot, he won't be unanimously inducted.

D-Train - we have respectfully disagreed in the past, and I think this is another one of those cases. I don't think a side by side comparison of Beltre and Ichiro is fair. Yeah - Beltre hit for more power and put up more WAR. But of course Ichiro started his career in the majors at a time when most players were peaking (and had accumulated stats and WAR for several years). 1,600 of his hits came when he played in Japan - yeah, the competition is less than MLB, but they also play 30 games less per season. Ichiro's style of play was different - he never wanted to hit homers, even though he easily could. He was the best leadoff hitter of his generation, and he was a a defensive wizard. They're just different players.

You can line up the trophy cases, and Ichiro is just as impressive as Beltre. But here are 2 other factors that I think are relevant: first, Ichiro is the greatest player to come out of Japan not named Ohtani. Second, he paved the way for Ohtani. He did for baseball what Wayne Gretzky did for hockey - he normalized it. He brought fans and players from Japan to the US. He expanded the sport. And his career was never tainted by controversy, and he did it all without PEDs.

So yeah. I'm babbling. But I contend that Ichiro should be a unanimous, first ballot inductee. There shouldn't even be a question about it. But I doubt it will happen. Sadly. For me, at least. ;)

Captain 97
Posts: 3038
Joined: Mon May 06, 2019 9:23 pm

Re: HOFer (inevitable) Ichiro Suzuki

Post by Captain 97 » Wed Jan 24, 2024 6:53 pm

I do think that Ichiro will get credit with the voters for his time in Japan. Ichiro also has two batting titles, an MVP, a rookie of the year and a major league single season record. Beltre has none of those. I don't think he will be unanimous but I think he will get more votes than Beltre did.

User avatar
D-train
Posts: 73245
Joined: Mon Apr 29, 2019 1:33 am
Location: Quincy, MA

Re: HOFer (inevitable) Ichiro Suzuki

Post by D-train » Wed Jan 24, 2024 6:59 pm

Captain 97 wrote:
Wed Jan 24, 2024 6:53 pm
I do think that Ichiro will get credit with the voters for his time in Japan. Ichiro also has two batting titles, an MVP, a rookie of the year and a major league single season record. Beltre has none of those. I don't think he will be unanimous but I think he will get more votes than Beltre did.
So give him credit for his 7 years in Japan AND regard him as a Rookie at age 27 AND give him credit for a ROY and an MVP that Boone should have won. As I have mentioned Edgar also wasn't a full time player until age 27 had the same WAR as Ichiro AND had to wait 10 years to get elected.
dt

User avatar
D-train
Posts: 73245
Joined: Mon Apr 29, 2019 1:33 am
Location: Quincy, MA

Re: HOFer (inevitable) Ichiro Suzuki

Post by D-train » Wed Jan 24, 2024 7:13 pm

Here is the thing about thinking someone should be unanimous. If you think a guy belongs in the HOF don't you ALWAYS think he should be unanimous???

It isn't really possible think a guy should be in the HOF but you think that some voters shouldn't vote for him on the 1st ballot, right? It's nonsensical.

It is binary, either a voter votes for him or he doesn't. You can't say I think a guy should get 80% of the vote unless voters were to rate him on a 1-10 scale with an average score of 7.5 or higher getting in.
dt

Big_Maple
Posts: 1684
Joined: Fri Aug 12, 2022 8:55 pm

Re: HOFer (inevitable) Ichiro Suzuki

Post by Big_Maple » Wed Jan 24, 2024 7:45 pm

D-train wrote:
Wed Jan 24, 2024 7:13 pm
Here is the thing about thinking someone should be unanimous. If you think a guy belongs in the HOF don't you ALWAYS think he should be unanimous???

It isn't really possible think a guy should be in the HOF but you think that some voters shouldn't vote for him on the 1st ballot, right? It's nonsensical.

It is binary, either a voter votes for him or he doesn't. You can't say I think a guy should get 80% of the vote unless voters were to rate him on a 1-10 scale with an average score of 7.5 or higher getting in.
It's more nuanced than that, D-Train. Specifically:

The BBWAA committee will prepare a ballot listing in alphabetical order eligible candidates who (1) received a vote on a minimum of five percent (5%) of the ballots cast in the preceding election or (2) are eligible for the first time and are nominated by any two of the six members of the BBWAA Screening Committee.

So there may be 20 or 30 or more eligible players on the ballot in any given year.

Then:

B. An elector will vote for no more than ten (10) eligible candidates deemed worthy of election. Write-in votes are not permitted.

So, let's say one person casting their ballot decides not to vote for Ichiro in his first year of eligibility because - for whatever reason, capricious or otherwise - they don't think he is in their top 10 that year, then the vote is not unanimous. It may not be that the person casting the ballot doesn't think Ichiro is worthy - just that there's 10 other guys who are more worthy at that moment in time.

>>If you think a guy belongs in the HOF don't you ALWAYS think he should be unanimous???

What I think doesn't matter. There are tons of guys who are on the ballot at least once who don't get elected. It's what the majority of sportswriters think, year after year. It's conceivable that every ballot-casting member the BBWAA thinks Ichiro is in their top 10 in which case it's unanimous. It's equally probable that every single ballot-casting member of the BBWAA does not vote for a guy on the ballot and then he's off for good.

User avatar
D-train
Posts: 73245
Joined: Mon Apr 29, 2019 1:33 am
Location: Quincy, MA

Re: HOFer (inevitable) Ichiro Suzuki

Post by D-train » Wed Jan 24, 2024 8:04 pm

Yeah I just don't think anyone should expect hundreds of people to agree with them or think there is some problem or flaw in the system if they don't. When you say you think he should be unanimous your are saying EVERY voter should vote for him on the 1st ballot even though you just provided valid reasons why they might not.
dt

User avatar
D-train
Posts: 73245
Joined: Mon Apr 29, 2019 1:33 am
Location: Quincy, MA

Re: HOFer (inevitable) Ichiro Suzuki

Post by D-train » Wed Jan 24, 2024 8:07 pm

I mean look at Randy's credentials. Literally NOTHING missing. He did it ALL. Yeah only got 97.3% of the vote. Ichiro has many flaws that voters could point to.
Capture.JPG
Capture.JPG (32.24 KiB) Viewed 311 times
dt

Big_Maple
Posts: 1684
Joined: Fri Aug 12, 2022 8:55 pm

Re: HOFer (inevitable) Ichiro Suzuki

Post by Big_Maple » Wed Jan 24, 2024 8:10 pm

D-train wrote:
Wed Jan 24, 2024 8:04 pm
Yeah I just don't think anyone should expect hundreds of people to agree with them or think there is some problem or flaw in the system if they don't. When you say you think he should be unanimous your are saying EVERY voter should vote for him on the 1st ballot even though you just provided valid reasons why they might not.
Yes, and yes. There are lots of reasons - some good, some maybe not good - for why someone might not vote for him on his first year of eligibility.

It just seems like for guys like, say, Griffey, that he is such an obvious choice for election that he should have been unanimous, but wasn't; he was shy by 0.7%. Makes me scratch my head.

Unless I am reading the rules wrong, a guy just has to be on every single ballot to be unanimous - he doesn't have to be everyone's first choice. I doubt they even have to rank their choices.

User avatar
D-train
Posts: 73245
Joined: Mon Apr 29, 2019 1:33 am
Location: Quincy, MA

Re: HOFer (inevitable) Ichiro Suzuki

Post by D-train » Wed Jan 24, 2024 8:21 pm

Big_Maple wrote:
Wed Jan 24, 2024 8:10 pm
D-train wrote:
Wed Jan 24, 2024 8:04 pm
Yeah I just don't think anyone should expect hundreds of people to agree with them or think there is some problem or flaw in the system if they don't. When you say you think he should be unanimous your are saying EVERY voter should vote for him on the 1st ballot even though you just provided valid reasons why they might not.
Yes, and yes. There are lots of reasons - some good, some maybe not good - for why someone might not vote for him on his first year of eligibility.

It just seems like for guys like, say, Griffey, that he is such an obvious choice for election that he should have been unanimous, but wasn't; he was shy by 0.7%. Makes me scratch my head.

Unless I am reading the rules wrong, a guy just has to be on every single ballot to be unanimous - he doesn't have to be everyone's first choice. I doubt they even have to rank their choices.
Right. Every year there are guys submitting blank ballots or only voting for one or two guys. Its crazy but unless they scrap the voting system in favor for an objective quantitative system (highly unlikely) then everyone gets to yell at the dumb voters every year. lol

Of course people would then just yell at the computers.
dt

Post Reply